“Show your working” is how the book starts, yet. The author shamelessly presents ideas of other thinkers and philosophers as her own all the way through the book.
Why would Penguin Round House publish a text that is inciting violence? Clearly calling for a diverse tactics of violent methods in her arguing for “better world”.
“Arguing for the better world” is the title. Yet, the author does not define what “better world” is. Which would be the absolute basic requirement for writing a book with a title like that. Which turned the entire book into “a guide to household virtue signalling”. If the author would look for genuine change, they would define the goal. Without a logical goal, any action becomes a meaningless virtue signalling.
The circular logic of the argument is the key to plausible deniability inserted in every chapter of the book. The card “oh, this is a reverse racism, not racism”. Because there are always a lot of stereotypical groups above in the hierarchy of suffering.
According to the author, person’s suffering is the ultimate virtue. As long as a person’s suffering is relatively lower on author’s hierarchy, anything goes. This is a circular logic fallacy that infected the pages and the author herself. The method allows the following to thrive on the pages of this book: homophobia, sexism, dog whistling, racism, whataboutery, transphobia, fig leafing and incitement of violence.
I want my money back. However, the capitalist structures, shamelessly and strategically used by the author, will not make that happen. The author will drive profit through her sloppy and intellectually dishonest labour for years to come.